The topic of addictions has been brought up so many times by so many members here, that it got me really thinking. At one point Laura posted this on another thread:
http://youtu.be/ao8L-0nSYzg
and it made a lot of sense.
Anyway, digging into this topic led me to the book Love and Addiction, by Stanton Peel and Archie Brodsky. I found it to be quite interesting in this respect, and think that any of you who is interested would get something out of it. I know it helped me understand some of my traits better, even if I never thought of myself before as an "addict". It's not just about drugs or any other chemical substance, but also about habits, "love", how we try to escape things within ourselves that are difficult to acknowledge, "buffers" (to use Gurdjieff's terminology), and all in all, some good analyses of how little we know ourselves, and how little science knows. In fact, of how detrimental some techniques and medical advice can be, when the roots of "addiction" aren't treated.
So, it's more about breaking tendencies that, though seemingly positive and calming at the beginning, are blinding and ultimately very harmful. It can be anything, from drugs to being addicted to other people (constant desire for appreciation/validation, unhealthy boundaries/dynamics in love relationships or with relatives and friends), shopping, gambling... even to "drama"/self-pity... you name it.
The authors are very critical of many things that us here already know about: the pathology in the system, from the educational institutions, to narcissistic families to pharmaceuticals, and how everything seems to be designed to control people and make them feel and become powerless. They focus mainly on the US system and culture, but I think it applies pretty much to every other country.
They make what I thought were good points regarding how the 12-Step programs, or some self-help books like Women Who Love Too Much, or Codependent No More (for those of you know have read those), are not always a good solution, because they are telling the person that they are “sick”, that they’ll always be “recovering addicts”, etc. which makes them feel powerless. Well, I think it depends on each person. Those programs have helped a lot of people. Perhaps what’s most effective in them is the fact that people who are suffering build a group that feels more like a true family, and have a support system. I see nothing wrong with looking for God or whatever “superior” power to help. But, they make a point in saying that sometimes that can be tricky, because it means relinquishing responsibility, asking something or someone else to “save you” instead of taking charge of your life (and we know how much room for lies and disinformation and harm that can leave). And they can remove all confidence in one's own power to overcome obstacles.
Other than that, there are quite a few case studies and studies quoted regarding the lack of proof to affirm that drugs/chemicals substances in and of themselves are addictive. They explain the difference is within the person. They also quote from cases of "love addiction" between two people, either romantically involved or part of the same family (mother/child, etc.).
Here are some quotes, and I'll try to post some more later in case anyone is interested. All in all, I think that, with the knowledge gathered here in the forum, and from the recommended reading list, looking at addiction in this way can give one pause to think about the REAL problem, the lack of hope that sometimes invades us, the struggles in the Work, the tendencies to fall back asleep, and more importantly, how to recognize all this so that we can then heal, AND be more in control of ourselves. And ultimately, it is SO related to being able to sincerely be as much of services to others as we can instead of trying to control and get our needs met in all the possible wrong ways, that I think it can be really important. Because it's the relationships we build, what we can give to others, that makes a difference in this pathological world. And for that, we need to grow ourselves, to Work on ourselves, to learn to see the unseen within and in the world, and gather as much knowledge as possible, because it is Love.
So, the way out of an addiction seems to be understanding it, and finding a BETTER habit. Something like our Aim here. Something higher than ourselves, a real purpose in life. And when you find it, then you don't want to have those bad habits anymore, because they'd be taking away energy and time from what is really important to the real YOU, to those you love and care about. Like Gurdjiieff said, what is good and bad depends on the circumstances. What leads you closer to your goal is good, what pushes you further away from it is bad (paraphrazing). Thus, it's not so much a process of punishing yourself (though discipline and super-efforts are involved), or changing out of guilt and shame (those can be huge motivators, but they shouldn't be paralyzing), but of sticking to those goals that are important, focusing on them, and the "addiction" will take less of a hold on you, step by step. Sure, it involves in the process facing the darker parts of ourselves, and that hurts. But it's conscious suffering, the reward of which is much greater than something we may use or do now for immediate gratification.
Needless to say, the authors don't mention (or don't know about) many other things that can be involved, such as a lot of body chemistry linked to emotions, hyperdimensional influences, past lives, spirit attachments, information theory, brain pathways, etc. But, the trick is to make one "immune". And we have to begin somewhere: observing, understanding, and applying what we've learned to the best of our ability. And networking!
Well, just FWIW, and in case anyone wonders if they'll EVER get over something. It is possible! Hard, but maybe not so much when we change the focus and try to do it for the right reasons. Then, it's a challenge worth exploring. What do we have to lose, after all?
http://youtu.be/ao8L-0nSYzg
and it made a lot of sense.
Anyway, digging into this topic led me to the book Love and Addiction, by Stanton Peel and Archie Brodsky. I found it to be quite interesting in this respect, and think that any of you who is interested would get something out of it. I know it helped me understand some of my traits better, even if I never thought of myself before as an "addict". It's not just about drugs or any other chemical substance, but also about habits, "love", how we try to escape things within ourselves that are difficult to acknowledge, "buffers" (to use Gurdjieff's terminology), and all in all, some good analyses of how little we know ourselves, and how little science knows. In fact, of how detrimental some techniques and medical advice can be, when the roots of "addiction" aren't treated.
So, it's more about breaking tendencies that, though seemingly positive and calming at the beginning, are blinding and ultimately very harmful. It can be anything, from drugs to being addicted to other people (constant desire for appreciation/validation, unhealthy boundaries/dynamics in love relationships or with relatives and friends), shopping, gambling... even to "drama"/self-pity... you name it.
The authors are very critical of many things that us here already know about: the pathology in the system, from the educational institutions, to narcissistic families to pharmaceuticals, and how everything seems to be designed to control people and make them feel and become powerless. They focus mainly on the US system and culture, but I think it applies pretty much to every other country.
They make what I thought were good points regarding how the 12-Step programs, or some self-help books like Women Who Love Too Much, or Codependent No More (for those of you know have read those), are not always a good solution, because they are telling the person that they are “sick”, that they’ll always be “recovering addicts”, etc. which makes them feel powerless. Well, I think it depends on each person. Those programs have helped a lot of people. Perhaps what’s most effective in them is the fact that people who are suffering build a group that feels more like a true family, and have a support system. I see nothing wrong with looking for God or whatever “superior” power to help. But, they make a point in saying that sometimes that can be tricky, because it means relinquishing responsibility, asking something or someone else to “save you” instead of taking charge of your life (and we know how much room for lies and disinformation and harm that can leave). And they can remove all confidence in one's own power to overcome obstacles.
From Phyllis Hobe, author of Lovebound: “ACoAs aren’t getting the kind of help they really need because most forms of treatment tend to reinforce their problems… We have always felt powerless to do anything about the conditions of our lives; in recovery we are told that this is true – and it’s not going to change. Instead of teaching us the skills of self-sufficiently, which we desperately need, we are urged to expect a “Higher Power” to look after us.
Other than that, there are quite a few case studies and studies quoted regarding the lack of proof to affirm that drugs/chemicals substances in and of themselves are addictive. They explain the difference is within the person. They also quote from cases of "love addiction" between two people, either romantically involved or part of the same family (mother/child, etc.).
Here are some quotes, and I'll try to post some more later in case anyone is interested. All in all, I think that, with the knowledge gathered here in the forum, and from the recommended reading list, looking at addiction in this way can give one pause to think about the REAL problem, the lack of hope that sometimes invades us, the struggles in the Work, the tendencies to fall back asleep, and more importantly, how to recognize all this so that we can then heal, AND be more in control of ourselves. And ultimately, it is SO related to being able to sincerely be as much of services to others as we can instead of trying to control and get our needs met in all the possible wrong ways, that I think it can be really important. Because it's the relationships we build, what we can give to others, that makes a difference in this pathological world. And for that, we need to grow ourselves, to Work on ourselves, to learn to see the unseen within and in the world, and gather as much knowledge as possible, because it is Love.
“Addiction is an experience, one which grows out of an individual’s routinized subjective response to something that has special meaning for him – something, anything, that he finds so safe and reassuring that he cannot be without it, even as it wreaks havoc on the rest of his life. [...] The antithesis of addiction is a true relatedness to the world, and there is no more powerful expression of that relatedness than love, or true responsiveness to another person.
[...] An addiction is an experience that takes on meaning and power in the light of a person’s needs, desires, beliefs, expectations, and fear. Compulsive, dependent attachments arise from the contrast between the barrenness and anxiety people sense in the rest of their lives and the immediate fulfillment they expect to feel when engaged with the addictive object or sensation.
[...] Everyone has habits and dependencies of varying severity. An addiction is a habit that gets out of hand. They key to understanding addiction is to realize the function the addiction serves in the individual’s life. For example, addiction is not an unfortunate side effect of powerful painkillers like narcotics. Rather , powerful pain relievers are addictive to the extent that they remove pain quickly and effectively. It is pain relief, feelings of power or reassurance, and other essential human experiences that some people, and many people under some circumstances, seek in addictive drugs. [The authors go to a great length to cite cases where people DON’T get addicted when they have fulfilling lives, or they do but only temporarily in times of stress/problems, but they recover quickly as soon as they have something to look forward to, etc.]
[...] People outgrow their addictions when they learn to value new associations and ways of spending time aside from the addictions, when they can cope better with the everyday demands of life, when they have accomplished enough so that losing the new roles and responsibilities they have attained would be unthinkable, when they come to feel capable of managing their lives – in short, when they develop an identity that precludes their old self-destructive behavior. [Related to this, the authors explain that this is the reason why abstinence is not a cure. The point is to make that need/emotional "hole" that created the need/craving for a specific substance or habit “shrink”, rather than stop it cold turkey and see it as a punishment. If you have better things to do, a higher goal, etc. you won’t have time nor want the addictive stuff anymore, basically.]
[...] 1) physiological habituation plays at most a small part in any kind of addiction, 2) addiction is created not by the substance or object, but by how the person experiences it, so that the person can use anything in either a healthy or unhealthy way, 3) the experience of addiction is essentially the same whether or not a drug is involved, 4) the causes of addiction are not mysterious, but are part and parcel of the circumstances of a person’s life.
[...] If addiction is now known NOT to be primarily a matter of drug chemistry or body chemistry, and if we therefore have to broaden our conception of dependency-creating objects to include a wider range of drugs, then why stop with drugs? Why not look at the whole range of things, activities, and even people to which we can and do become addicted? We must, in fact, do this if addiction is to be made a viable concept once again. At present, addiction as a scientific notion is falling into disuse because of the mass of contradictory data about drugs and their effects. Since people who take narcotics often do not get addicted, scientists are beginning to think that addiction does not exist. Yet, more casually, we find that word being used in an increasing number of contexts – “addicted to work”, “addicted to gambling”- because it describes something real that happens to people.
Addiction does exist, and it is a large issue in human psychology. [It’s] a pathological habit. It occurs with human necessities, such as food and love, as well as with things people can do without, such as heroin. [They mention nicotine too in several places, which we know is not in the same category, and they later contradict themselves regarding smoking, so I’ll skip that.]
[...] addiction is not something mysterious, something about which our ordinary experience has nothing to say. It is a malignant outgrowth, and extreme, unhealthy manifestation, of normal human inclinations. We can recognize examples of addiction in ourselves even when we would not characterize ourselves entirely, or basically, as addicts. This is why the idea of addiction can be an important tool in our self-understanding. But for its value to be realized, it must be redefined. There has to be a fundamental change in the way we thing about addiction.
[…] Questions of self-mastery and mastery over the environment provide the key to the susceptibility to addiction; when we think of drugs as overpowering, it is because we doubt our own psychological strength.
[...] […] Our families have a tremendous impact on our addictive or nonaddictive potential, since they teach us either self-confidence or helplessness. Self-sufficiency or dependency. Outside the family, much of our modern social environment takes the form of organizations, such as schools. Our experiences with such institutions can instill in us serious doubts about our capacity to manage our own lives, let alone to interact creatively with the rest of the world. And in reality, they may keep us from developing that capacity to the fullest. Here is where the impulse toward escape and dependency arises. [..] [We live in a] culture which teaches a sense of personal inadequacy, a reliance on external bulwarks, and a preoccupation with the negative or painful rather than the positive or joyous.
[…] the addict is a person who never learns to come to grips with his world, and who therefore seeks stability and reassurance through some repeated, ritualized activity. This activity is reinforced in two ways – first, by a comforting sensation of well-being induced by the drug or other addictive object; second, by the atrophy of the addict’s other interests and abilities and the general deterioration of his life situation while he is preoccupied with the addiction. As alternatives grow smaller, the addiction grows larger, until it is all there is. A true addict progresses into a monomania, whether the object of addiction is a drug or a lover.[. ..] the habit becomes the raison d’être of their existence.
It is important to note the vicious cycle at work here. The addict’s lack of internal direction or purpose creates the need for ritualized escape in the first place, and is in turn exacerbated by exclusive involvement with the addiction and abandonment of the substance of normal life. Operating on the personal malaise and addict feels, drugs give him an artificial sense of self-sufficiency that removes what small motivation he has for complicated or difficult pursuits.
[In the case of love addiction, the person is] addicted to a sensation, a prop, an experience which structures his life. What causes the experience to become an addiction is that it makes it more difficult for the person do deal with his real needs, thereby making his sense of well-being depend increasingly on a single, external source of support.
[…] [Withdrawal is as real in the case of chemical substances as it is in the case of a separation or the end of relationships]. It is an agonizing sense of the absence of well-being a sense of some terrible deficiency inside oneself. This is the major, personal upheaval that results from the loss of a comfortable buffer against reality.
[…] we have to start with people’s needs, and then ask how the drugs fit into those needs. What psychological benefits does a habitual user seek from a drug? What does the fact that he needs this type of gratification say about him, and what are the consequences of him obtaining it?
On depressant drugs: […] Narcotics, barbiturates and alcohol suppress the user’s consciousness of things he wants to forget. [...] all these drugs are depressants. They inhibit reflexes and sensitivity to outside stimulation. Heroin in particular detaches a person from feelings of pain, lessening the awareness of physical and emotional discomfort. The heroin user experiences what is called “total drive satiation”; his appetite and sex drive are suppressed, and his motivation to achieve – or his guilt at not achieving- likewise disappear. Opiates remove memories and worries about unresolved issues and reduce life to a single striving. […]
The dulling of sensibility, the soothing feeling that all is well, is a powerful experience for some people, and it may be that few of us are entirely immune to its appeal. Those who depend totally on such an experience do so because it gives their lives a structure and secures them, at least subjectively, against the press of what is novel and demanding. This is what they are addicted to. In addition, since heroin diminishes mental and physical performance, it reduces the habituated user’s ability to cope with his world. […] while he is involved with the drug and feeling relief from his problems, he is even less able to deal with these problems and thereby becomes less prepared to confront them than he was before.
On stimulants: The primary action of a stimulant is to give a person the illusion of being energizes through the freeing of stored energy for immediate use. Since that energy is not being replaced, the chronic stimulant taker is living on borrowed energy. Like the heroin user, he is doing nothing to build up his basic resources. His true physical or emotional state is hidden from him by the artificial boosts he gets from the drug. If he is withdrawn from the drug, he experiences all at once his actual, now very depleted condition, and he feels wrecked.
On the similarity between both: […] A person repeatedly seeks artificial infusions of a sensation, whether it be one of somnolence or vitality, that is not supplied by the organic balance of his life as a whole. Such infusions insulate him from the fact that the world he perceives psychologically is becoming farther and farther removed from the real state of his body or his life.
[…] a fundamental similarity between opiate addiction and love. In both cases, a person repeatedly seeks out a kind of stimulation which is intensely pleasurable. But as time goes on, he finds that he needs it more even as he enjoys it less. The heroin addict gets less and less of a positive kick from the drug, yet he must return to it to counteract the insistent pain caused by its absence. The lover is no longer so excited by his or her partner, but is more and more dependent on the comfort of the partner’s continued presence, and is less able to handle a separation. Here the negative aftereffect overcomes initially positive stimulation.
So, the way out of an addiction seems to be understanding it, and finding a BETTER habit. Something like our Aim here. Something higher than ourselves, a real purpose in life. And when you find it, then you don't want to have those bad habits anymore, because they'd be taking away energy and time from what is really important to the real YOU, to those you love and care about. Like Gurdjiieff said, what is good and bad depends on the circumstances. What leads you closer to your goal is good, what pushes you further away from it is bad (paraphrazing). Thus, it's not so much a process of punishing yourself (though discipline and super-efforts are involved), or changing out of guilt and shame (those can be huge motivators, but they shouldn't be paralyzing), but of sticking to those goals that are important, focusing on them, and the "addiction" will take less of a hold on you, step by step. Sure, it involves in the process facing the darker parts of ourselves, and that hurts. But it's conscious suffering, the reward of which is much greater than something we may use or do now for immediate gratification.
Needless to say, the authors don't mention (or don't know about) many other things that can be involved, such as a lot of body chemistry linked to emotions, hyperdimensional influences, past lives, spirit attachments, information theory, brain pathways, etc. But, the trick is to make one "immune". And we have to begin somewhere: observing, understanding, and applying what we've learned to the best of our ability. And networking!
Well, just FWIW, and in case anyone wonders if they'll EVER get over something. It is possible! Hard, but maybe not so much when we change the focus and try to do it for the right reasons. Then, it's a challenge worth exploring. What do we have to lose, after all?